Thursday, December 21, 2017

How To Win A Fight In Apocalypse World

The bulbfly, crept around the inner circumference of the wallglobe, its glowing, deformed gut casting jagged shadows past its legs and abdomen over the bed and Char’s (1) face, which was kind or pretty but not both (2).

“Fuck my tits, Vonk the Sculptor (3).”

“Oh Char,” said Vonk the Sculptor, “Oh Char oh Char oh Char,” he shifted in the afternoon haze, “Would that I could jizz massively and wild on those stout twin beige hillocks, yet I cannot.”

“Don’t you…” she pulled at her knees on the chaotic bed, arranged her compact or sturdy but not both body against the splayed gingham and neoprene “…don’t you…want to?”

“I do, but…it’s fucking complicated.”

Uncoiling, she took a weary drag on a vape patched with green gaffer’s tape “Try me.”

“Tomorrow approacheth the fearful Juck, harshly astride his Yamaha and trailed by his loathsome biking gang. There will be conflict.”

“I know,” she slid over, wrapped him in the medical patchwork of her long arms “We can take them, Vonk the Sculptor, it’ll be ok.”

“It’s not that,” he said, “it’s…well you know how every time we have sex you get +1 to your next roll? (4) ”

"Of course,” she blinked her quick-or-hard-but-not-both eyes “Why do you think I do it? There’s a gang of mutant bikers coming tomorrow to kill us all, I need a +1 going forward. You told me that's why gunluggers always have to fuck everyone in the camp before a fight. Or at least that's what they always say when they're,” she narrowed or hardened her eyes "walking out the door."

“Yes, but…in order to help you I will need to roll+Hx (5). That is: the stat that records how much History we have.”

“That’s fine. That’s the way things go in this Apocalypsed World. I’ve made my peace with it,” a gecko crawled through the bent nest of black cables meshing the weathered floor “we all have.”

“But here’s the thing, Char. I already have max Hx with you—+3. If I shoot a load on your tits tonight it will reset to +1, and I’ll be that much less able to help.”

“Fuck,” said Char.

“I know, right?” said Vonk the Sculptor.

“Wait,” said Char “does tit-fucking count as sex?”

“I mean: it says ‘fucking’ in the name. And the rule says ‘If you and another character have sex, your Hx with them on your sheet goes immediately to +3, and they immediately get +1 to their Hx with you on their sheet. If that brings their Hx with you to +4, they reset it to +1 instead’.”

“Ok, but listen,” Char’s eyes went wide (but not bright because they were already quick or hard) “What if you do my tits but then—wait for it—I suck you off—oral sex, then you assfuck me. Then, yeah, your Hx resets to +1 but then it goes back up to +2, and then +3!”

“Well that’s kind of a normal day. But is that having sex three times or once?”

“Well if you’re worried we can just stop for a few minutes and watch an episode of Butt Thesis in between. That’s definitely three distinct times we had sex, then.”

“Oh, whoa. How come we didn’t think of having sex three times earlier? Why would anyone just have sex once?”

“Or any non-multiple-of-three amount of times?”

“Hey, wait. Every time my Hx resets I get more xp.”

“Oh shit.”

“Right! So we can just have sex a lot tonight and….”

“Yeah—I mean you said you were going to spend a few hours setting up caltrops and trenches and oil pits you could set on fire, but if you can just eat my pussy, then stop and have a snack, then start eating it again..what is that? 135 more times and…”

1. What is the lie? 2. House rules are not literal interpretations of rulebooks. This post is a literal interpretation of the wording of sex moves on character sheets without applying any of the context of the rulebook. It is intellectually dishonest to be a rules lawyer for one game and not for another.3. Come to think of it, every GM is different so somebody somewhere probably does play like this. But I still feel trolled.

1. You lied when you wrote "when you criticize game rules you never apply any common sense to the mechanics"You need to address that now, and since the scope of your statement is not just this post but literally every time I have ever criticized a game rule, if you'd like to argue you made an accurate statement, you're going to have to quote every single time I've ever criticized game rules.

Also: I don't criticize any game rules in this post. It's a story, not a post making any statement about game rules. So it's bizarre you'd bring up the subject of criticism here.

2. House rules are not literal interpretations, true. This post is not a literal interpretation, it's a story about some AW characters talking to each other. I am not "rules-lawyering" I am writing a story about 2 characters discussing AW rules.

3. I don't know how anyone but me plays this game--I don't make any assertions about that in the post

4. It seems like you sensed a game you like was being attacked even though it was just being tickled and so made a large number of insane assumptions. You should stop doing that.

You say "Also: I don't criticize any game rules in this post. It's a story, not a post making any statement about game rules. So it's bizarre you'd bring up the subject of criticism here.

2. House rules are not literal interpretations, true. This post is not a literal interpretation, it's a story about some AW characters talking to each other. I am not "rules-lawyering" I am writing a story about 2 characters discussing AW rules.

3. I don't know how anyone but me plays this game--I don't make any assertions about that in the post"

All that is literally true. But do you think it's unreasonable to wonder why you wrote a story that (unless I tragically misunderstood the humor/interest in it) had at least a bit of a laugh at how counterintuitive the benefits of sex are in AW?

Do you intend there to be no larger takeaway from this post---that it is just a story?

You say "It seems like you sensed a game you like was being attacked even though it was just being tickled and so made a large number of insane assumptions. You should stop doing that."

Now no doubt his statement "you never apply any common sense to the mechanics" is almost certainly false. But do you think "just tickl[ing]" is the *only* reasonable reading of this post?

These are serious questions; I'm actually interested in having a discussion on this.

If you're "wondering" what you do is ask a question, not make insane accusations.

"Do you intend there to be no larger takeaway from this post---that it is just a story?"

Mostly it's just amusing. What is demonstrates is that is you go at AW from a mindset that is outside the AW target audience, it's a very funny game. This is not an attack on AW. This is probably true of all games.

"But do you think "just tickl[ing]" is the *only* reasonable reading of this post?"

Any negative assumption about anyone should be checked before being stated, otherwise you risk libel. Patrick assumed: this was wrong.

“Sex as a workable mechanic”: there were a couple of attempts in the past (starting with the recurring joke about Sex in D&D by Phil Foglio) but I never seen anything that wasn’t clunky, juvenile, or both.

If anyone can point to a decent attempt I would be interested in having a look at the rules.

If you're going to write things like this, Consider authoring some Centaur *erotica*. Self-publish it on Amazon. You could do the artwork for it as well.

There is a huge market for that sort of paraphilia. It's a barely tapped market.

Your introduction contains a comma fault. It is a run-on sentence. Maybe fix that. A semi-colon will do the trick. As it stands, it makes you appear unlettered. Hardly befitting the future author of best-selling bawdy and ribald centaur stories.

I'll stop assuming anything and everything when it comes to you and your blog.

You're right, I feel insulted. Maybe that wasn't your intent and maybe I shouldn't, but I do. This post might not have been meant to mock people who like Apocalypse World, but it was clearly meant to mock the game.

So with a lot of your commentary on PbtA games over the years, Zak, I've always noticed that the "hard eyes, quick eyes, dreamy eyes" thing has particularly annoyed/fascinated/bemused you (by all means provide me with a more accurate word for the sentiment it makes you feel)

I was wondering if you could elaborate on what particularly (insert sentiment)s you about this. Is it the fact that taking the rule at face value one is limited to three or four clichéd options, or is it the fact that is presumes to bother including such trivial things at all when players could just make it up by themselves? Or is it something else?

1. Is it the fact that taking the rule at face value one is limited to three or four clichéd options

Yes. And that even as examples they're cliche.

2.,is it the fact that is presumes to bother including such trivial things at all when players could just make it up by themselves? Or is it something else?

Yes

ESPECIALLY considering the whole appeal of the game over some other post-apoc game is how its supposed to be great bc it's directed by player improv.

Our players are supposedly creative, quick-thinking people upon whom the success and distinctiveness of the game applies yet they can't think of a name for their own character and are impressed by something as basic as "quick eyes"?